1/26
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
---|
No study sessions yet.
social influence
refers to many ways people affect one another
involves changes in attitudes and behavior resulting from comments/actions/presence of others
social learning theory
many animals, including humans, can learn by watching others
chameleon effect
unconscious mimicry of the nonverbal mannerisms of an interaction partner
Chartrand and Bargh (1999) → Chameleon effect study
group pressure (Asch, 1956)
“what circumstances lead people to follow group pressure?”
participants were asked same question in group of confederates, but all confederates responded w/ wrong answer
results → 35% conformed overall, 75% conformed at least once
conformity
a change in behavior to be in line w/ the majority
why do people conform?
informational influence
normative influence
informational influence
social influence where individuals change beliefs or behaviors b/c they perceive others as having more accurate info, knowledge, or expertise
others provide info
leads to internalization (private acceptance)
normative influence
type of social influence where individuals conform to norms, beliefs, or behaviors of a group to gain social acceptance or avoid social disapproval
we feel pressure to fit in (try to be normal)
leads to public compliance (no internalization)
ex: Asch study
when do people conform?
group size
unamity
anonymity
status and experience
culture
gender
group size
3-4 people allows greatest conformity
Milgram’s Looking at Nothing study
less people looking up → only 40% of passer-bys conformed
4 people looking up → 80% conformed (also looked up)
unamity
if there is even 1 dissenter, conformity decreases
ex: Asch studies (when one person dissented, conformity dropped to 5%)
anonymity
responding in front of group members makes conformity more likely
if responding anonymously, less likely to conform
status and experience
if group members are high in status and experience, more likely to conform in front of them
culture
interdependent cultures → more susceptible to information and normative social influence
gender
women conform more in stereotypically male domains
men conform more in stereotypically female domains
compliance
responding favorably to a direct request (not a demand) made by another person
compliance techniques
foot-in-the-door effect
door-in-the-face effect
low-balling
reciprocity
appeal to norms (descriptive/prescriptive norms)
foot-in-the-door effect
if someone agrees to a small request first, they’re more likely to comply later w/ a larger request
Freedman and Fraser (1966) - Drive Carefully Study
no initial request → 17% agreed to big request
small request first (petition) → 76% agreed
door-in-the face effect
if someone turns down a large request first, they’re more likely to comply w/ a more reasonable request
Blood Donor Study
donate blood for long-term? then: donate blood tmr? → 50% agreed
only: donate blood tmr? → 32% agreed
low-balling
people who agree to an initial request maintain commitment when the request increases
Cialdini et al. (1978)
agreement increased from 24% to 56% w/ initial commitment
reciprocity
the expectation that people will help those who have helped them
tit for tat
descriptive norms
what are most people actually doing?
actually doing, not what they should be doing
prescriptive norms
what should people be doing?
what they should be doing, not what they are actually doing
obedience
a change in behavior in response to a command from someone in a position of authority
Milgram (1974)
obedience study
cover story: effects of punishment on learning
instructed to give shocks for incorrect responses, 15 volts to 450 volts
results → 65% went to 450 volts
altering obedience
characteristics of authority figure - strength and distance
characteristics of situation
emotional distance (remote shock = 100%, hold hand to shock plate = 30%, other flipping switch = 93%)
institutional authority (higher authority/reputation = more obedience)
presence of resistors (reduces obedience)
reactance
a motive to protect one’s sense of freedom; arises when freedom feels threatened
occurs when we feel someone is trying to limit choices or decisions
response to a threat to our freedom